Hi all
Just finished reading Lance Armstrong's biography 'It's not about the bike'. If you have not already read it, I suggest you do bike fan or not.
His fight with cancer was a miraculous story and just goes to show that if you have the will power you can achieve anything so long as you put your all into it. A fitting lesson in a time where laziness seems to breed contagiously.
What is even more remarkable is his return to top flight cycling and his subsequent 7 Tour victories. Now I was not a great follower of cycling before this book, but I have now sat up and taken note.
These guys are truly the elitest of the elite in the athlete world. The tests they put their bodies through are immense and it surely has to be the toughest endurance sport around.
However I am sceptical. After finishing the book naturally I got onto youtube and watched some of his clips of his winning and press conferences that followed.
The question of doping although present in any sport seems to hang like a viral illness, a cancer if you like over cycling. I studied his press conferences with intent trying to keep an open mind however the more I viewed them the more I became convinced that he did dope.
Now there is a divide clearer than sea water and fresh water when it comes to opinions on Lance and doping. However the most drug tested athlete ever always came up clean.
I am also divided, either he did dope which he never actually clearly answers the question to but always skirts back to his illness or the chemotherapy which involved EPO a banned substance for athletes was given in such high doses due to his cancer that it invariably had a positive effect on his body after the cancer had also dissipated.
Either way he definitely came back a stronger person after the cancer, no doubt down to hard work and gut wrenching effort. However there is still a niggling doubt in the back of my mind that this great athlete may not be as clean as we all hope.
Lance Armstrong
posted on 4/1/12
I dont think cancer had a "positive effect on his body" it just changed it, allowing him to become an overall tour contender rather than stage racer.
As for drugs and Lance Armatrong it's pretty much an endless and completely pointless argument that will be waged forever.
posted on 4/1/12
I didn't say it was the cancer that had the positive effect but the EPO which probably helped him in his field.
posted on 4/1/12
My mistake.
I believe introduced EPO only lasts in the body for a short time, around 24hrs. It's stimulus effects can last for two weeks, there is little scientific evidence to suggest any EPO he may or may not have recieved.
The Armstrong EPO issue is that urine sample from 1999 were tested in 2005 and apparently positive.
posted on 4/1/12
Well 1999 was the year he has just finished his chemo so it would be likely that there may still be some traces left in him at the time?
Also when his team mates came out and claimed they used EPO with Lance during training would probably have no effect on his races if it only lasted in the body for no more than 24 hours?
I know it's all probably done to death but I am quite new to it all and it's actually an extremely fascinating sport.
Watched a 50 min youtube clip of Cavendish and that guy is an absolute animal over 500m!
posted on 25/1/12
Ok lets say he did take EPO, then you would have to assume most of the others were taking it at the time as well.
What made Armstrongs run of tour de france victories, was that he would make that his focus of the year and everything would revolve around the tour. He hardly raced the Giro or Vuelta.
posted on 6/2/12
As I understand it EPO increases the red blood cell count, on average I believe red blood cells last 120 days, so the effects of EPO could last that long, though after 4-6 weeks the effects would be increasingly minimal - if you ever been at altitude for a while and doen sport when you come home you'll notice the effect. It doesn't make you go faster, you just don't get tired and can keep the same workrate up for ages.
I think it was Sir Arthur Conan Doyle who wrote (as part of a Sherlock Holmes story) that when you have eliminated everything else whatever you are left with, however, ridiculous, must be the truth. Armstrong was tested repeatedly over 10 years and was never found to have a positive test, ergo, he did not take illegal drugs
posted on 8/5/12
Yeah, we all know that cancer of the brain, lungs and gonads followed by gruelling chemo really has a "positive effect on the body". What medical journals have you been reading?